I consider myself solidly pro-life. I believe abortion is a scourge and am not in favor of pregnancies being terminated because it’s inconvenient or for some other frivolous reason. I believe people are created in God’s image and it’s not our place to do anything that diminishes or thwarts that divine essence. That said, I’m prayerfully considering voting for a presidential candidate whose position on the issue of abortion is not in alignment with mine. Here’s why.
I recall a conversation over lunch almost four years ago with a college classmate who was passing through town. During the course of our time together, we talked about the upcoming presidential election and how the candidates the two major parties put forward were both unsavory options—that we felt like no matter what we did, we’d have to hold our nose and ask God for forgiveness for supporting someone whose character was so reprehensible. He said that, at the end of the day, he was voting, not for a particular candidate, but for a stance on a particular issue—namely, their position on the matter of abortion. I told him I didn’t think that was enough for me. And it wasn’t. I ultimately determined I couldn’t in good conscience support the candidate from either party and ended up writing in my vote.
I’ve been thinking about that in the four years since. Did I waste my vote? Was I wrong to not overlook the character issues and vote for the candidate whose stance on abortion most fully aligned with mine?
Here’s what I’ve concluded—that there’s a whole lot more to being pro-life than being anti-abortion … that the sanctity of life debate is not meant to be limited to the window of “from conception to natural birth.” If a person is truly pro-life, I believe he/she must care about the sanctity of life from conception to natural death. While the pro-life issue begins with the matter of abortion and what happens inside the womb, it doesn’t end there, for there are any number of issues that have to do with human flourishing. For me to be truly pro-life means I care greatly about all these things and don’t elevate one particular, albeit very important, issue over all the others. It means I have a biblically balanced view of things—that I strive to care about all the various things that God cares about which contribute to our ability live life to its fullest.
Fact of the matter is, there are a number of things that stymie, impede and can ultimately kill persons made in the image of God. For instance …
Global poverty. A recent article I read said that an estimated 9 million people die every year from hunger and/or hunger-related illnesses. In a world with an abundance of resources, this is unacceptable. If each of these people are created in the image of God, should we not factor into how we vote which candidate is most likely to approve funding and develop programs to alleviate these conditions? I would posit this is a pro-life issue.
Healthcare. The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not guarantee health coverage for all, and studies have shown that people without health insurance are less likely to visit a doctor, more likely to have poor health, and more likely to die prematurely. If each of these people are created in the image of God, should we not factor into how we vote which candidate is most likely to implement a workable plan for healthcare for all? I would posit this is a pro-life issue.
Racism. For centuries, slavery dehumanized and killed numerous African-Americans. In the years since its abolition, racist white Americans—many of whom called themselves Christians—lynched thousands of black people. The recent widespread outrage over the deaths of George Floyd and Jacob Blake has called attention to the fact that African-Americans are far more likely to die at the hands of police than white Americans. If each person, regardless of skin color, is created in God’s image, should we not factor into how we vote which candidate is most likely to implement a workable plan to address this injustice? I would posit this is a pro-life issue.
Climate change. The overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is that global warming is real and unless we drastically reduce the emission of certain gases, the result will be devastating changes—more terrible storms, expanding deserts, increasing starvation and death. And who will suffer the most? The poor. While many of us can adjust our thermostats and offset some of the effects of global warming, those who live in substandard housing or developing nations cannot. If each of these people are created in the image of God, should we not factor into how we vote which candidate is most likely to embrace a plan to address climate change? I would posit this is a pro-life issue.
Education. For people in poverty, the opportunity to receive a quality education is the great equalizer. It opens the door to jobs, resources, and skills people need not just to survive, but thrive. It helps develop in students the necessary social, emotional, cognitive and communication skills to break the cycle of poverty. But quite often, the worst schools are located in the poorest neighborhoods. If every child is created in the image of God, then should we not factor into how we vote which candidate has the best plan to help our schools improve and serve students from an impoverished background? I would posit this is a pro-life issue.
We could probably add a number of other issues to this list, but here’s my point: Abortion is not the only pro-life issue and, for that reason, should not be the litmus test of what it means for us to be pro-life. To reduce whether one is pro-life to one’s stand on abortion and become a one-issue voter is not only to simplify a very complex topic, but it also misrepresents what it means to be pro-life in the biblical sense. Neither party, with their policies and positions on these various matters, is going to fully encapsulate a biblically defined pro-life position. If we say we’re basing our vote on our pro-life beliefs, we must factor a number of issues into our decision. To base our vote on any single issue is to overlook a number of other things that powerfully come to bear on the matter of life’s sanctity. That’s why the National Association of Evangelicals said in its official public policy document that “faithful evangelical civic engagement and witness must champion a biblically balanced agenda.” And while God certainly cares about the unborn and what goes on inside the womb, there are a number of other things He greatly cares about that contribute mightily to our ability to live a robust, flourishing life. And that’s what it means to be pro-life—to be fully committed to creating an environment where every person made in God’s image can thrive and realize his/her innate, ingrained possibilities.